2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
It is probably the second best left heterodox program in the country after UMass Amherst, but they are definitely outside the overall top 60 programs by anyone's measure. They have a rep for poor funding, though that does not seem to be the issue in your case. The grad student to faculty ratio is pretty bad (I think about 15:1 if you include both masters and PhD students) and their placement record is not good compared to mainstream programs of similar rank. The student to faculty ratio combined with poor funding also means that they have a much longer than average time to completion of PhD than similarly ranked schools (about 7-8 years compared to the more typical 5-6). The better more well known faculty are also somewhat older and their one high caliber mainstream economist (Salih Neftci) passed away a couple of years ago.
If your goal in your MS is to move on to a PhD at a mainstream program, you should definitely not go. If you want to continue on with your PhD there or at UMass Amherst it is not a bad choice but by going to a heterodox PhD program you heavily limit your placement opportunities. If you want to go to industry after the MS you are better off going to a mainstream program, even without funding unless you specifically want to work for a left heterodox friendly think tank.
My general opinion is that you are always better off going to a mainstream program even if you are interested in heterodox theory because going to a mainstream program gives you more options and better placements. Then you can study the heterodox theory on your own at a later date. Many of the larger mainstream schools have a token heterodox faculty member who could provide you with the materials for self study of heterodox theory.